• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

UK General Election - 8th June 2017 |OT| - The Red Wedding

Status
Not open for further replies.

phisheep

NeoGAF's Chief Barrister
No pacts, no agreements, no supply and confidence, no coalitions, no secret foot rubs.

We have not ruled out a coalition with the Greens or the Monster Raving Loony Party, or indeed Plaid, but if you vote Lib Dem, you get Lib Dems.

We are a pro-EU, pro-UK party. If you are not both of those things, we will under no circumstances ally with you. If May/Corbyn resigned and the respective party committed to remaining in the single market or the EU, then that would be different. But that is not on the cards.

Passing budgets and individual votes would not be much fun in such a situation, but that would be a second general election situation anyway.

Are you entirely certain about that Huw?

If, for example, the LibDems came third in number of seats, but enough Labour MPs wanted to defect to you that you could be the official opposition ... you're telling me you'd hold an entrance exam for them?

Don't believe you.

(p.s. had a chat with my daughter last night - got you two more LibDem votes in Liverpool)
 
I just don't understand why. The conservatives over the past 40 years have been doing everything they possibly can to fuck over the poor.

It's like turkeys voting for Christmas.
Not for me . I did pretty well out of Thatchers policies. I left school , spent five years qualifying my skills and within a year became my own boss . Only two years after that I'd purchased a 3 bedroom house in a decent area.
To be fair I also did well under Blair until the bankers fucked everybody but themselves.
Labour should have built a surplus in preparation for a recession but alas, they didn't.
That oversight and the overburden of tax and regulation they applied to small business /self employed are the only real complaints I have about new labour.
I beleive if you're willing to work hard , anyone can prosper with either a centre left or centre right party in power.
 
If, for example, the LibDems came third in number of seats, but enough Labour MPs wanted to defect to you that you could be the official opposition ... you're telling me you'd hold an entrance exam for them?

Don't believe you.

Ah, that is individual MPs, not party platforms.

So if Bob defects from party 1 to 2, Bob will accept the manifesto and policy of party 2.

Whereas if Bob enters coalition with party 2, he still is under the flag of party 1.

If Labour defected en masse, they'd be signing up to the Lib Dem platform, not a Labour one hidden in the Lib Dems. Such is the activities of the Trotskyite entryists they would be fleeing from!

Defections are weird, though, as would be entering coalition with a new party.

I think we could go into coalition with, say, a new SDP, if they signed up to the single market, a united UK, a referendum on the final deal, etc. Those are the red lines atm which make coalitions impossible.
 

Maledict

Member
Weird aside, but in my mental map of the forum Crab and Cyclops are actually the same person adopting contrary positions to confuse us all. Because they both write intelligent, interesting posts in a humorous, lecturing sort of way.

It therefore always perplexes the hell out of me when one responds to the other...
 
D

Deleted member 231381

Unconfirmed Member
I'm asking you think because I'm interested and you'll probably know the answer, but how do you think this will (or does) skew with age? There's a pretty significant correlation there with age. Is that, as the commentators above suggested, because the older generations are far less likely to have gone to university, or is this a trend that our generation will also see applied to it (we will get more likely to vote Tory as we age)? If so, how does this work with your suggestion that class (indicated by educational attainment) is a good indicator? The types of jobs available to one when they're 25 and 35 isn't significantly different (though the ones they want might be), yet it seems like in those ten years they're likely to switch.

My understanding is that for most people, they form their political opinions quite young (in your 20s) and then those opinions don't change throughout their life. You do tend to see people become slightly more Conservative over time regardless, but that's not them shifting, that's because the parties shift - if you were very liberal in 1950 but continued to hold the same positions until 2020, you would not be especially liberal because of how society has shifted on those issues (e.g., you were pretty damn liberal for supporting the decriminalisation of homosexuality at one point, now supporting gay marriage is blasé).

The current older generation genuinely is just especially Conservative - their cohort has always been very Conservative, because if you are 65 now, and you formed your political consciousness when you were 25, that was in 1977 - that is, you were part of the Thatcherite generation. Even thirty years ago, the older generation was less Conservatively titled because the pre-Baby Boomers tended to be inclined towards Labour.

This probably is reflective of class differences and the changing nature of the economy over that period. Age obviously does impact your class - a pensioner who was a factory worker in 1980 and is retired now has different class characteristics to someone who is a factory worker now and can expect to be a pensioner in 2040, because how factory workers are treated is different, the strength of the unions is different, the nature of competition from globalisation is different, what we can expect from the pension system is different.

I don't know how much that answers your question. It's genuinely a topic that fascinates me (class construction over time) and I think something critically understudied.
 

PJV3

Member
Not for me . I did pretty well out of Thatchers policies. I left school , spent five years qualifying my skills and within a year became my own boss . Only two years after that I'd purchased a 3 bedroom house in a decent area.
To be fair I also did well under Blair until the bankers fucked everybody but themselves.
Labour should have built a surplus in preparation for a recession but alas, they didn't.
That oversight and the overburden of tax and regulation they applied to small business /self employed are the only real complaints I have about new labour.
I beleive if you're willing to work hard , anyone can prosper with either a centre left or centre right party in power.

The financial crash was so huge Brown would have needed to store a fuckload of cash to have made a difference.
 
The financial crash was so huge Brown would have needed to store a fuckload of cash to have made a difference.
I'm not going to argue with you about that but having something would have been better than nothing. His decision to sell our gold reserves at the lowest price point qhen the economy was thriving wasn't sensible .
 
The lib-dem 'no coalitions' policy works well to set them up as the party of Fuck Brexit in an election with no realistic possibility of a hung parliament.

I hope they'll take a more pragmatic position in 2022 when we hopefully have a more centrist Labour party and a chance of kicking out the Tories.
 

TimmmV

Member
The financial crash was so huge Brown would have needed to store a fuckload of cash to have made a difference.

Building a surplus would also have also carried the opportunity cost of not investing too. The economy would have been a lot weaker had Brown done that, for very little gain.
 
Weird aside, but in my mental map of the forum Crab and Cyclops are actually the same person adopting contrary positions to confuse us all. Because they both write intelligent, interesting posts in a humorous, lecturing sort of way.

It therefore always perplexes the hell out of me when one responds to the other...

Poor ol' Crab, being put that in basket!

My understanding is that for most people, they form their political opinions quite young (in your 20s) and then those opinions don't change throughout their life. You do tend to see people become slightly more Conservative over time regardless, but that's not them shifting, that's because the parties shift - if you were very liberal in 1950 but continued to hold the same positions until 2020, you would not be especially liberal because of how society has shifted on those issues (e.g., you were pretty damn liberal for supporting the decriminalisation of homosexuality at one point, now supporting gay marriage is blasé).

The current older generation genuinely is just especially Conservative - their cohort has always been very Conservative, because if you are 65 now, and you formed your political consciousness when you were 25, that was in 1977 - that is, you were part of the Thatcherite generation. Even thirty years ago, the older generation was less Conservatively titled because the pre-Baby Boomers tended to be inclined towards Labour.

This probably is reflective of class differences and the changing nature of the economy over that period. Age obviously does impact your class - a pensioner who was a factory worker in 1980 and is retired now has different class characteristics to someone who is a factory worker now and can expect to be a pensioner in 2040, because how factory workers are treated is different, the strength of the unions is different, the nature of competition from globalisation is different, what we can expect from the pension system is different.

I don't know how much that answers your question. It's genuinely a topic that fascinates me (class construction over time) and I think something critically understudied.

Intriguing! It'll be interesting to see what "Blair's children" end up being.
 

PJV3

Member
I'm not going to argue with you about that but having something would have been better than nothing. His decision to sell our gold reserves at the lowest price point qhen the economy was thriving wasn't sensible .

Aye, he should have been more prudent.
The gold thing is seriously overstated, the daily mail came out with a figure that ignored the value of assets he traded it for.

I'm probably wrong but he also wanted assets to be diverse and earn interest, but it's been a while since I looked into. It, it was a logical decision, not a wild punt.
 
The lib-dem 'no coalitions' policy works well to set them up as the party of Fuck Brexit in an election with no realistic possibility of a hung parliament.

I hope they'll take a more pragmatic position in 2022 when we hopefully have a more centrist Labour party and a chance of kicking out the Tories.

I mean the hope is that we replace the Labour Party as the 2nd place party this election, especially in England, which places us well to take on the Tories in 2020 AS the centre left party people want Labour to be.

Or hell a Macron happens, or a Trudeau, and Farron somehow ends up as PM and we get to actually have a properly fair election in 2022 after several nerd fights break out as we debate various voting systems.

It beats being miserable and sighing each time you hear 'Brexit' on the news.
 

Theonik

Member
Depressing.
It is important to remember that ultimately this doesn't matter. The bigger issue here is how the conservatives are the biggest group for every education level which on a FPTP system is all that matters. Lib Dems and Labour splitting the vote benefits the Tories tremendously.
 
Aye, he should have been more prudent.
The gold thing is seriously overstated, the daily mail came out with a figure that ignored the value of assets he traded it for.
I wouldn't have a clue what the Mail wrote and maybe I'm missing important figures . However he sold the gold when the global economy was buoyant and gold market prices tend to be lower.
 

War Peaceman

You're a big guy.
I mean the hope is that we replace the Labour Party as the 2nd place party this election, especially in England, which places us well to take on the Tories in 2020 AS the centre left party people want Labour to be.

Or hell a Macron happens, or a Trudeau, and Farron somehow ends up as PM and we get to actually have a properly fair election in 2022 after several nerd fights break out as we debate various voting systems.

It beats being miserable and sighing each time you hear 'Brexit' on the news.

You need to have someone actually engaging for that to happen, not Farron.

Also, remember that for all of the Cleggmania we suffered through there was still no huge gain for the LDs.
 
You need to have someone actually engaging for that to happen, not Farron.

Also, remember that for all of the Cleggmania we suffered through there was still no huge gain for the LDs.

True to the latter, and I personally think Farron is a good media performer who will sell our message well this campaign.

This campaign is about having a go - there's nothing that is impossible.
 

OG Kush

Member
Did that "who should I vote for" website quiz. I got SNP and that Wales but as I'm in London, the next two were Lib Dem and Green party. Both with the same percentage. I'm in dilemma. Which one is better to reduce conservative damage?
 

PJV3

Member
I wouldn't have a clue what the Mail wrote and maybe I'm missing important figures . However he sold the gold when the global economy was buoyant and gold market prices tend to be lower.

Im not gonna drag this out as it's history, if you look at the price when he sold it, it wasn't out of the ordinary. He unfortunately missed out on years of a crazy increase in value.

He's definitely unlucky.
 

Acorn

Member
This gold shite again. I thought you dropped that after you won in 2010 as it's a complete non issue in the grand scheme of things hence the majority not giving a fuck once they got power.

Even if it did matter hindsight is 20/20.

Edit you=tories not sure of x posters party.
 

StayDead

Member
Did that "who should I vote for" website quiz. I got SNP and that Wales but as I'm in London, the next two were Lib Dem and Green party. Both with the same percentage. I'm in dilemma. Which one is better to reduce conservative damage?

Look at your local election results previously, then vote either Green or Lib Dem. Whoever did better.

Labour are not looking for anything but a hard Brexit so they'll be just as damaging.
 

Theonik

Member
Did that "who should I vote for" website quiz. I got SNP and that Wales but as I'm in London, the next two were Lib Dem and Green party. Both with the same percentage. I'm in dilemma. Which one is better to reduce conservative damage?
It depends on your local area. Voting strategically is important.
 
D

Deleted member 231381

Unconfirmed Member
Did that "who should I vote for" website quiz. I got SNP and that Wales but as I'm in London, the next two were Lib Dem and Green party. Both with the same percentage. I'm in dilemma. Which one is better to reduce conservative damage?

Research your constituency and figure it out that way.
 

TimmmV

Member
Im not gonna drag this out as it's history, if you look at the price when he sold it, it wasn't out of the ordinary. He unfortunately missed out on years of a crazy increase in value.

He's definitely unlucky.

The fact that it did so kind of shows the volatility in its value too. Brown got his prediciton wrong, but at the time there was no indication its value would rise. This is a good FT article talking about it.

I'll never get why people give so much shit to Brown for "selling off the gold", whereas the Tories can sell off undervalued stakes in Royal Mail/Eurostar/RBS and it's totally fine
 

PJV3

Member
The fact that it did so kind of shows the volatility in its value too. Brown got his prediciton wrong, but at the time there was no indication its value would rise. This is a good FT article talking about it.

I'll never get why people give so much shit to Brown for "selling off the gold", whereas the Tories can sell off undervalued stakes in Royal Mail/Eurostar/RBS and it's totally fine

It's better to criticise him for unleashing the PFI monster without making sure hospital managers etc knew what the hell they were doing.
 
Election: Theresa May urges voters to 'strengthen my hand'

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-politics-39698499

Voting for May will do nothing to increase the leverage that Britain has in negotiations with the EU. Not one single thing. These are high-level international negotiations here, not a job interview where looking confident matters.

She knows that what she's saying is rubbish, but she says it anyway because she thinks the average person is an idiot.
 
The fact that it did so kind of shows the volatility in its value too. Brown got his prediciton wrong, but at the time there was no indication its value would rise. This is a good FT article talking about it.

I'll never get why people give so much shit to Brown for "selling off the gold", whereas the Tories can sell off undervalued stakes in Royal Mail/Eurostar/RBS and it's totally fine
No ,its not fine . Anyhow I'm not picking up on the gold so much, just that I think they should have shored up the finances a little, along side investing etc. My post says I was quite happy overall with Blair's time in office from a personal financial perspective . I'm not really giving them shit at all.
 

PJV3

Member
Election: Theresa May urges voters to 'strengthen my hand'

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-politics-39698499

Voting for May will do nothing to increase the leverage that Britain has in negotiations with the EU. Not one single thing. These are high-level international negotiations here, not a job interview where looking confident matters.

She knows that what she's saying is rubbish, but she says it anyway because she thinks the average person is an idiot.

It sounds plausible until you remember 27 other countries with their own politics to worry about. It's working though I think, that and people simply writing off Corbyn a long time ago.
 
It sounds plausible until you remember 27 other countries with their own politics to worry about. It's working though I think, that and people simply writing off Corbyn a long time ago.

Of course it's working. The majority of people can't be arsed to think things through. It's why we've got Brexit in the first place.

But it just pisses me off that they're trying this shit. Anyone who falls for it deserves what's coming, unfortunately they'll drag the rest of the people down with them which is why I have such a disdain for them.
 

Jezbollah

Member
Election: Theresa May urges voters to 'strengthen my hand'

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-politics-39698499

Voting for May will do nothing to increase the leverage that Britain has in negotiations with the EU. Not one single thing. These are high-level international negotiations here, not a job interview where looking confident matters.

She knows that what she's saying is rubbish, but she says it anyway because she thinks the average person is an idiot.

That is quite the line to use, isn't it? The only thing I can think of on a simplistic side is that a larger majority from an Election victory will essentially eliminate the question of Parliamentary acceptance of a potential deal when it goes for a vote. But of course, that's for after any kind of negotiation.....

It smells of something Crosby has cooked up... and I think if driven home vs what Labour are coming up with, it will resonate.
 
That is quite the line to use, isn't it? The only thing I can think of on a simplistic side is that a larger majority from an Election victory will essentially eliminate the question of Parliamentary acceptance of a potential deal when it goes for a vote. But of course, that's for after any kind of negotiation.....

It smells of something Crosby has cooked up... and I think if driven home vs what Labour are coming up with, it will resonate.

Imagine her furiously wanking under the table whilst telling voters - yes, including you - to "strengthen my hand". Woof. Yes please, mum.
 

PJV3

Member
Imagine her furiously wanking under the table whilst telling voters - yes, including you - to "strengthen my hand". Woof. Yes please, mum.

Your weird Tory women fetish is really unsettling, I have no desire to even register her vagina as a concept in my mind.

I imagine 80s Theresa complete with powerful shoulder pads really floats your boat.
 
D

Deleted member 231381

Unconfirmed Member
Your weird Tory women fetish is really unsettling, I have no desire to even register her vagina as a concept in my mind.

To be fair, at least he's not a Glaswegian pensioner beating it off to gorillas wearing Union Jacks.
 
D

Deleted member 231381

Unconfirmed Member
You're doing a Thornberry, the flag makes it acceptable.

I'm picturing that bald-eagle-weeping-in-front-of-US-flag picture, only now with a silverback gorilla winking seductively in front of the Union Jack.

Patriotism!
 

Hazzuh

Member
The FTs law correspondent wrote a twitter thread about the EUs Brexit position:

1. You can imagine the fun of reading every EU statement related to Brexit since early last year. But having done so, some points.

2. The EU side of Brexit has been markedly transparent. You can easily trace the evolution of the negotiating position.

3. It has also been markedly consistent: EU statements made within hours of the referendum result are still sound guides to action.

4. EU has set the terms of the Brexit negotiation. Read as a conversation, May's two big speeches look more like belated admissions.

5. EU has also mastered the process. By the time "guidelines" are formally adopted this week, there is little scope for UK to alter things.

6. The need for Council and Parliament approval means that terms of the Exit deal are locked in, UK has little room to make big changes.

7. AJP Taylor once wrote of "war by timetable". From the EU's perspective, this is going to be "Brexit by timetable" and on EU's terms.

8. Most interestingly, most of the key elements of the EU side were demonstrably in place *before* May was even prime minister.

9. In my view, it is not so much the Tory hardliners who have shaped UK policy but EU's early and firm approach. UK few other options.

Seems reasonable to me and I think it does a good job of exposing how strange the present discussion surrounding Brexit in the UK is. The EU will essentially dictate a position to the UK which we will either accept or refuse, the election won't change anything about that.

The only thing this election will do is increase the likelihood that we crash out without a deal because lots of Remain-y Labour MPs are going to be replaced by total nutters.
 

TimmmV

Member
No ,its not fine . Anyhow I'm not picking up on the gold so much, just that I think they should have shored up the finances a little, along side investing etc. My post says I was quite happy overall with Blair's time in office from a personal financial perspective . I'm not really giving them shit at all.

Sorry, that wasn't aimed specifically at you. My complaint is more at the way Brown selling off the gold is portrayed as this huge economic mistake, whereas recent Tory privatisations are totally glossed over.

Imagine her furiously wanking under the table whilst telling voters - yes, including you - to "strengthen my hand". Woof. Yes please, mum.

Well that was a mental image I certainly didn't need for the commute back home
 

phisheep

NeoGAF's Chief Barrister
Election: Theresa May urges voters to 'strengthen my hand'

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-politics-39698499

Voting for May will do nothing to increase the leverage that Britain has in negotiations with the EU. Not one single thing. These are high-level international negotiations here, not a job interview where looking confident matters.

She knows that what she's saying is rubbish, but she says it anyway because she thinks the average person is an idiot.

What she's saying is absolutely true.

It isn't just the leverage that the UK has with the EU that matters, but also the leverage that May has with her own party and with Parliament. You only need to look back as far as John Major and the Maastricht treaty to see that, an episode that is seared into Conservative party minds.
 

Maledict

Member
That is quite the line to use, isn't it? The only thing I can think of on a simplistic side is that a larger majority from an Election victory will essentially eliminate the question of Parliamentary acceptance of a potential deal when it goes for a vote. But of course, that's for after any kind of negotiation.....

It smells of something Crosby has cooked up... and I think if driven home vs what Labour are coming up with, it will resonate.

It's a brilliant line - Blairs article in the guardian yesterday touched on it. She's basically turned a party political stance into a national interests stance - support May to get the best deal in Europe. The issue is, it really, really works because 95% of the county have almost no understanding of Brexit (including most remained).

Whether it's crossbys or not, one thing is certain right now - it's absolutely working. She is on course for a stonking majority, and it won't be because of her specific policy proposals but because this has become a 'support your country, vote for May' election.
 

Acorn

Member
It's a brilliant line - Blairs article in the guardian yesterday touched on it. She's basically turned a party political stance into a national interests stance - support May to get the best deal in Europe. The issue is, it really, really works because 95% of the county have almost no understanding of Brexit (including most remained).

Whether it's crossbys or not, one thing is certain right now - it's absolutely working. She is on course for a stonking majority, and it won't be because of her specific policy proposals but because this has become a 'support your country, vote for May' election.
Curious if the electorate will recall being swindled in 5 years.

I wager not. We're due a recession too in the next few years, unless we're in cloud cookoo land of 90s to 2008 again.
 
D

Deleted member 231381

Unconfirmed Member
What she's saying is absolutely true.

It isn't just the leverage that the UK has with the EU that matters, but also the leverage that May has with her own party and with Parliament. You only need to look back as far as John Major and the Maastricht treaty to see that, an episode that is seared into Conservative party minds.

Not really, though. The negotiation of treaties is a matter of royal prerogative. There's no more bills that need passing; May can do whatever she likes in the process of Brexit from this point on. The only thing she requires Parliament for is to vote for the final deal... but given the alternative to voting for a final deal is crashing out to WTO terms, nobody will vote for that. This is not all like Major's situation, which required a series of contentious votes to amend UK law in-line with the EU requirements and where there were a variety of feasible alternatives.

What she's saying is not true at all.
 

PJV3

Member
Not really, though. The negotiation of treaties is a matter of royal prerogative. There's no more bills that need passing; May can do whatever she likes in the process of Brexit from this point on. The only thing she requires Parliament for is to vote for the final deal... but given the alternative to voting for a final deal is crashing out to WTO terms, nobody will vote for that. This is not all like Major's situation, which required a series of contentious votes to amend UK law in-line with the EU requirements and where there were a variety of feasible alternatives.

What she's saying is not true at all.

The only thing besides smashing the labour party that makes any sense is the freedom to allow more EU control during transition. Nice timing for the next election really.

Is Farron really going to have to say everyday if he agrees with God about gay sex or not.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom